Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Capacitors & Sappers
Capacitors & Sappers |
Wed, 11 May 2005 06:09 |
|
PricklyPea | | Lieutenant | Messages: 534
Registered: February 2005 | |
|
Do capacitors increase sapper power as well as standard beams?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Sun, 12 June 2005 09:35 |
|
|
What is the maximum number of capacitors that will be useful for a ship and/or starbase?
The stars calculator does not calculate beyond 10. Does it mean that any additional capacitors will be useless?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Sun, 12 June 2005 09:41 |
|
|
Got my answer from another post.
Max = 2.5x (10 normal capacitors and 5 HE caps.
Another question....
Is it better to have all sappers on a shield killing ship? or should I have some normal beam weapons as well?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | | | |
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Mon, 13 June 2005 08:29 |
|
|
"Continuing on Sappers, for BB designs only having 12 missiles, would you consider putting sappers for the remainder? The idea being that the BBs hold back but if beamers close in"
Usually at most only few sappers on missile ships for that emergency. Try to keep costs down per ship and attractiveness of missile ships down, sappers normally NOT used, better to keep the beamers away/sapped with other beamers.
It is OK to leave weapons slots empty, especially on missile ships.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Mon, 13 June 2005 14:22 |
|
mlaub | | Lieutenant | Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003 Location: MN, USA | |
|
Micha wrote on Mon, 13 June 2005 06:40 |
PricklyPea wrote on Mon, 13 June 2005 13:15 | Continuing on Sappers, for BB designs only having 12 missiles, would you consider putting sappers for the remainder? The idea being that the BBs hold back but if beamers close in, the sappers can drain shields before the missiles hit.
|
More often you see 6+6+4 missile BBs with sappers of gatlings in the 2*2 wing slots (or empty), reason behind that is to have iron saved to build more ships, those are called pocket BBs.
|
Actually, it is probably for slot damage. Since weapons are fired on a per slot basis, and damage applied per slot can overwelm individual ship armor (and destroy single ships), it *can* be more efficient to use only the slots that can kill a single ship. Otherwise damage is applied to the whole stack, which may be a waste of iron...
This is why missle/Torp BB's and DN's are still very effective in the endgame. Where as a ARM Nub can only have a 3 stack max of missiles and can't kill a single enemy Nub, even without shields, until the stack armor gets very low, the BB's and DN's can peel them off in large numbers much earlier. Many evenly matched, highly deflected, Nub battles can go several rounds before the beams can get through the shields. Meanwhile, missile ships that can blow up even a tiny % of enemy ships, vs just creating stack damage, can cause a catastrophic onesided victory.
Quote: |
I doubt 6+6 missiles and further all sappers is that cost effective ... never used them and never seen them used IIRC,
|
Not having Beam weapons on your Missile boats makes the hit and run tactics (Fed Kaufman(sp?) retrograde, for you SFB fans) more workable. Plus, it adds expense that gains you next to nothing. If your Missle boats get that close to the enemy beamers, it usually means you lost.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Mon, 13 June 2005 21:42 |
|
|
What about Sappers in the Nuban era? I would think it is more useful than in the BB era because of the strong shield stack the enemy will be able to get by stacking Nubians.
Pratap
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Wed, 15 June 2005 15:00 |
|
|
"More than 4 computers put on a sapper design seems overkill in most situations."
There are (rare?) situations where you may want more computers. Enemy may try a lighter/shieldless suicide gattling/range 2 or shieldless range 1 type design that first strikes your dedicated sapper. Whether your dedicated sapper strikes or is destroyed first may have huge impact on much larger fleets.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Wed, 15 June 2005 16:53 |
|
|
Quote: | presume sheildless so that the sapper does not back off. But what speed do you have these suicide gatlings to get into range and shoot without getting killed first?
|
Yes shieldless makes dedicated sapper go forward to find a shielded target.
Speed of sapper killers depends on rest of your fleet, is not always possible. If your main beamer fleet moves 2 squares forward first round (1.25-2.00 combat speed) then the sapper killer needs to move 3 (2.25+ combad speed) and be range 2.
If your main beamer fleet moves only 1 forward first round and enemy is using 2.25+ sappers fleet, then the suicide ships need to move 1.25+ (or 2.25+ if range 1). This super slow main beamer fleet has its uses as defensive method (protecting missile boats and/or starbase).
The without getting killed first part, you need to shoot before the sappers do which means really fast/high init. If you have higher init shot than any enemy in range of you, you get your shot off.
[Updated on: Wed, 15 June 2005 17:00] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Wed, 15 June 2005 19:55 |
|
|
"stack of Gats on your main design if you are wanting to take out a specialty ship like that"
Issues such as gattlings heavier, range 2, speed of main fleet, init of main fleet may make it better to counterdesign enemy specialty dedicated sapper.
In certain battles, the dedicated sapper may only be 10% of his force but make 50% difference whether it does its job or not.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Wed, 15 June 2005 23:54 |
|
mlaub | | Lieutenant | Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003 Location: MN, USA | |
|
multilis wrote on Wed, 15 June 2005 18:55 |
Issues such as gattlings heavier, range 2, speed of main fleet, init of main fleet may make it better to counterdesign enemy specialty dedicated sapper.
|
Of couse all factors should be considered. However, using Gats *is* a counter to the dedicated sapper. Certainly not the only one. Not sure what you are trying to say here.
Quote: | In certain battles, the dedicated sapper may only be 10% of his force but make 50% difference whether it does its job or not.
|
In other battles, 10% of his forces might make -50% difference. Actually, 60% of people polled, say they they like pretzels better than made up percentages...
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Thu, 16 June 2005 00:26 |
|
|
Quote: |
However, using Gats *is* a counter to the dedicated sapper. Certainly not the only one. Not sure what you are trying to say here.
|
Started as me pointing out some cases where 4 computers might not be enough for a dedicated sapper to do its job. Then was asked about detail on how such sapper killers would work, so gave examples. Not everyone here is at expert level yet....
Quote: | In other battles, 10% of his forces might make -50% difference. Actually, 60% of people polled, say they they like pretzels better than made up percentages...
|
A dedicated w15 sapper with 3 caps can do around 5000 damage in one blow. Similar w16 beamer can do around 1500. Saw real game difference higher, sapper having more caps than beamer.
Enemy beamers shields are brought down only if sappers succeed, missiles which fire next may do double damage only if sappers succeed.
Some peoples beamers are such that just taking out the shields is enough to make them more attractive than their frigate chaff. As BET, I had trouble even keeping less attactive than scout chaff once shields lost (chaff became so cheap).
...
But as you say even one ship of yours can actually hurt your battle badly or drastically help. For example, enemy backs out of starbase range, clean up foes then quickly advances on starbase alone rather than be hit by starbase every round... such can be the affect of just one of your own ships, perhaps even a fast sapper.
[Updated on: Thu, 16 June 2005 00:40] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Capacitors & Sappers |
Thu, 16 June 2005 01:53 |
|
mlaub | | Lieutenant | Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003 Location: MN, USA | |
|
multilis wrote on Wed, 15 June 2005 23:26 |
A dedicated w15 sapper with 3 caps can do around 5000 damage in one blow. Similar w16 beamer can do around 1500. Saw real game difference higher, sapper having more caps than beamer.
|
Yes, but it is a seperate design, and opens you up to easy counters. I have never been sold on it's use as a planned design. Not saying that it doesn't work, just saying that it is usually a secondary choice IMO. Or, if you are countering an enemy design flaw. Usually, I put sappers on my mainline W16 and W22 beamers in the expected shield to armor ratio. Then, if I need to build sappers to take out more than expected shields, it might be only a couple of ships that losing won't be big deal.
Quote: | Enemy beamers shields are brought down only if sappers succeed, missiles which fire next may do double damage only if sappers succeed.
|
Ah, I see. Many times I go low init on my missile ships on purpose. Sometimes shooting last is better than shooting first, on missile ships, and it saves on germanium. Really have to be careful, of course. Some might argue that you lose first shot opportunity, but I point out that low init will usually get the first round shot against warships, not chaff...if set up properly. Other advantages can be cheaper/more ships and less minerals used, which leads to more advantage.
Quote: |
Some peoples beamers are such that just taking out the shields is enough to make them more attractive than their frigate chaff. As BET, I had trouble even keeping less attactive than scout chaff once shields lost (chaff became so cheap).
|
That can be bad, but with BET you can use a slightly better beam weap, with out to much extra cost. One of the many reasons I don't use BET.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Jun 13 01:05:44 EDT 2024
|